As I watch the U.S. Open, I’m reminded of Samuel Beckett’s insight from “Westward Ho” every time I see a medium shot of (now) finalist Stan Wawrinka. The quote goes like this, “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”

I think of it when I see Wawrinka because it’s tattooed on his left forearm.

Four years ago, I set out to direct the feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” The film never got made. Simply put, I failed. (Or at minimum, did not succeed on my timeline). Ouch.

To be fair to myself, I did direct another feature film in this time frame that’s currently touring film festivals, the neo-noir poetry mindbender Guys Reading Poems. But the achievements of that film don’t remove the stubborn reality that I wanted to make “Inside-Out, Outside-In” and it didn’t happen.

Failure seems especially daunting in a culture dominated by a materialism that has even managed somehow to take over spirituality (VISUALIZE IT AND THE MILLIONS ARE COMING, DUE TO SPIRITUALITY!). We expect materialism with the Kardashians and reality television and, more cynically, in a corrupt political system. But now, even many self-help gurus and ministers peddle the idea that financial success and empowerment come to those who pray (correctly) and really believe it. So failure can feel not only like a setback, but also like the sign of a moral and spiritual shortcoming (YOU DON’T BELIEVE IN YOURSELF OR IN THE POWER OF THE UNIVERSE ENOUGH!).

Also, for those of us who identify with the struggling artist motif, there’s a shadow side to failure that sees in it not only moral shortcomings, but also moral superiority. After all, it’s easier to embrace failure if we think of those who’ve succeeded to higher levels than ourselves as cheaters or sociopaths or spiritually bankrupt lawyers (and indeed some of them are). The danger in thinking that way is that a failure can reinforce a false narrative that you failed because you’re too good to succeed, akin to the mantra “only the good die young” – which implies that the old among us are not so good. In this case, we can harbor thoughts of “only the good go unrecognized and fight on as starving artists” which implies that “only the corrupt (or sellouts) succeed.”

Neither of these strains of thought works for me anymore. Self-help gurus craft good soundbite, but I guarantee that 99% of them could not direct a feature film and pull it off. In fact, most of them wouldn’t get past dealing with SAG-AFTRA. And struggling artists holding onto their purity and embracing failure’s more noble undertones sometimes sell their passion project and then they buy condo’s, too. I’ve seen it happen.

My thinking now is that failure – especially failure in terms of the materialistic world – is just not that grandiose. In itself, it doesn’t show much about who we are as people. Some amazing artists never succeed financially and some do. Some extremely successful people got there because they cheated, lied and manipulated their way to the top. Others worked really hard and conscientiously extend a helping hand to those on the way up.

The quote implies that if you’re NOT failing it’s because you’re not trying. The only way you can’t fail is by having no aspirations at all in your life. And that’s the ultimate losing approach to being human.

This week, I set up our Google Drive and re-ordered all the folders with regards to “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” I called the first meeting of the few people involved with the project at this stage – my manager Bradley R. Bernstein, my brother J. Parker Buell and longtime Fatelink collaborator Camille Carida, who was in the reading of the material way back in 2013 and has been a constant source of encouragement on the script. We talked about our system of naming files, scanning receipts, recruiting producers, investors and talent, creating talking points for the film and organizing a reading of the revised script in November. Afterwards, Bradley said it was the best meeting I’ve ever run. For now, the film is like that. It’s just meetings and lonely hours at coffee shops rewriting and determining file naming conventions with the hopes that it’ll save us effort six months later when the team expands from four to 124. To the extent that I succeeded in this one meeting, I attribute to a willingness to try again, fail again, fail better. Thank you, Samuel Beckett for your wisdom. And Stan for enduring the pain of a tattoo (and for being amazing enough at tennis that we all get to see it).

Tomorrow, I’m heading to a very successful friend’s condo to watch the Stan Wawrinka-Novak Djokovic final (to save money, I don’t have a television or cable subscription right now). I love Djoker, but I’m pulling for Stan. I hope I catch a shot of his tattoo.

On Monday, I get back to work on “Inside-Out, Outside-In.”

Nathaniel is taken aback by Jason’s performance. Note: It’s a solo shot, unlike the other two auditions. (storyboard drawn by Monte Patterson).

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker living and working in Los Angeles. His feature film, Guys Reading Poems, is currently on the film festival circuit and will screen at the Breckenridge Film Festival on Friday, September 16th. His favorite tennis players are Stan Wawrinka and Novak Djokovic.

Probably the most common question I receive from fellow independent filmmakers is, ‘How do we make crowdfunding work for our project?’

I had the same question for my first feature film, Guys Reading Poems, and – luckily – I was able to ask Leah Cevoli, an expert in the field. She helped us navigate strategy and effective execution within the crowdfunding space and gave practical pointers to maximize our chances. Ultimately, we were successful in our raise, which has made all the difference in the life of our film. So since so many folks have questions about crowdfunding for their films, I thought I’d return to Ms. Cevoli and see what she had to say!

Leah Cevoli

Hunter: So Leah, I consulted with you on Guys Reading Poems Kickstarter crowdfunding campaign. I can honestly say that without your help, we would have died on the vine. So thank you for that. Crowdfunding is probably the number one topic that filmmakers bring up when they speak to me. They recognize its potential value to their lives, but are sometimes a little lost and overwhelmed with it. And sometimes I see that look in their eyes that says – FREE MONEY!!!! – and I worry. What would you say is the biggest misperception people have about crowdfunding for webseries, short films and feature films?

Leah: You’re welcome. I was truly impressed with how you absorbed all of the information I gave you AND put it into action for such a strong finish! Congrats!

The biggest misperception is that most filmmakers, inventors, etc think that if you have a great concept, you can put it up on a crowdfunding platform and it will get funded. The second biggest misperception is that if you have a great concept, cool rewards, and a great video you can place it on a crowdfunding platform and people will just find it and fund it.

Hunter: You mention inventors. Some people have expressed that – going forward – crowdfunding will be more effective for new consumer products and apps rather than filmed entertainment. I guess the theory is that people are essentially pre-buying items they can use rather than sort of angel gifting for an artist. Do you agree with this theory? How can films continue to expand in the crowdfunding space?

Leah: I do think that we will see more and more products, inventions if you will. Crowdfunding gives so many people that otherwise wouldn’t have had a chance to fund the next chia pet, snuggies, or pet rock a platform to get their idea out there. However, I don’t see it dying down for filmed entertainment either. If anything, it gives the consumer a better and more varied option of the entertainment choices they can view. And in effect, it’s a pre-buy for the film’s dvd, poster etc. Speaking of pre-buys, I believe if musicians paid more attention to crowdfunding, they could take much of the power back into their hands that was lost with the breakdown of record labels and online file sharing.

Hunter: That makes sense. And musicians have tour tickets to offer as well! If you had to narrow it down to a couple variables, what are the biggest differences between a campaign that is successful and a campaign that is unsuccessful?

Leah: Preparation, outreach to their personal friends and family, backer communications, and non-stop social media content.

Hunter: Very true. In our campaign, although it may’ve seemed like it was taking place ‘online’ I was making lots of personal phone calls to colleagues, friends and family members, lobbying them to back us. We held Kickstarter fundraisers – large and small. We arranged for potential substantial backers to tour our office and view some of our creative work. Online crowdfunding doesn’t take away your responsibility as a filmmaker to ask people for money in person or on the phone. You have to do it, in my opinion. So knowing that crowdfunding campaigns are sometimes more than meets the eye…what kind of prep time do you suggest for campaigns? Does that change depending on the amount of money being raised?

Leah: It depends on the team. Not so much the goal amount, but more so the size of their social networks, and the number of team members that are fully vested. It also depends on the skill-sets of the team; do they need to hire a video editor, a graphics person, a social media assistant? On average, I would say at least a month prep time, but in reality it’s probably more like three months.

Hunter: Where do you lean – Kickstarter or IndieGogo or another option?

Leah: I prefer Kickstarter for a number of reasons; the urgency of all or nothing is appealing to me and to most others, and the back-end is much more user friendly when communicating with backers. I do like IndieGogo, and have coached a dozen or so campaigns over there, but I prefer Kickstarter.

Hunter: What has been your happiest moment on a crowdfunding campaign?

Leah: Aw man, this is a tough one. I’ve had ecstatic moments on so many campaigns. I’ve appeared on the 11:00 news with the team of the feature film Blood Kiss. I’ve pulled all-nighters with clients. I’ve had major A-list celebs and magazines mention clients. There are a lot of happy moments. In a nutshell, every win has been a happy moment.

Hunter: Finally, you are a woman of many talents, including acting. How is your acting going? Does your expertise in crowdfunding help you in your acting or does it cause others to think you are “less serious” as an actress? Many of our readers have more than one talent and sometimes one is related to “business” and the other to “creative.” How do you balance the two in terms of your life and how you present yourself to others?

Leah: Thank you! I’ve got some really great projects coming out this year. I recently voiced two characters for the feature film The Grid Zombie: Outlet Maul, shot a lead role in the horror flick Killcast, and will soon be voicing a character in The Sultana Documentary, executive produced by Jim Michaels and Sean Astin. I’m also attached in various acting and producing capacities to quite a few projects who are scheduled to shoot in 2015.

I’ve been a member of SAG (now SAG-AFTRA) since 2005. I launched my crowdfunding business in 2013. I’ve been acting a lot longer, and have built up a name for myself, with some really great credits on my resume, yet I absolutely have struggled with the fear of not being seen as an actor if people see me as a crowdfunding manager. As artists, we never want people to associate us with anything but our artistic career, no one ever wants to talk about their waitress job, for fear of not seeming like a talented actor. For most of this time, crowdfunding has been my “waitress” job, and I didn’t really want to talk about. My clients have all been word of mouth, referrals and I’ve been happy with that. This year, 2015, I’m structuring it more like a business, speaking at more events and workshops, and boldly talking about my business outside of acting. I’m making it work for me, and to be honest, the majority of projects I’ve been cast in this year have been in some way related to crowdfunding. I’m leveraging my skills at raising funds, to align with better projects and teams. I think it’s becoming much more acceptable and frankly necessary, to have multiple streams of income based on your skillsets. Yes, I’m a damn good actress, but I’m also a wiz at crowdfunding and I’m embracing that, as should anyone else who’s reading this and concerned that one of their skills may diminish another. It’s just not true anymore.

Hunter: Agree with you 100%. Becoming a more savvy businessperson does not mean you are less of an artist. In fact, it’s empowering and that can help bring additional solidity to the creative side that’s then more free to experiment and take risks. Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to talk with us, Leah! And thanks for helping us with Guys Reading Poems. If we decide to crowdfund for Inside-Out, Outside-In, you’ll be hearing from me again…

For those of you interested in working with Leah, she has generously offered a 10% discount to readers of this blog. Let her know that you’re from InsideOut film blog and she will apply the discount!

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

I sat down with Shpetim Zero to discuss his passion for costume design and his frustration that wardrobe decisions aren’t always given the weight and time (and budget) they deserve. Film is a visual medium and, after all, the garments worn by characters are among the most compelling and revealing visual elements of a film. We sat down to talk at my apartment in West Hollywood, with Sphetim splitting his attention between me and my pug Romeo.

Hunter: So Sphetim, when did you first get into costume design?

Shpetim: I first started doing costumes in theater, in college. But I always had a thing for clothing. Even as a kid, I used to check out clothing, shoes – it was just an innate passion, figuring out how things were made. But it took a more tactile form, a practical form when I started doing costumes for theatrical productions in Santa Barbara. Then I delved more into it and went to school for it.

Hunter: You’ve had success as a haute coutre designer. How is it different to make a garment from scratch as opposed to finding the right item for a film character?

Shpetim: It’s a craft to somehow match something to a character, but it isn’t always necessarily the ‘right’ or ‘perfect’ thing. But when you’re building it, you can actually start the energy of the costume within the character’s energy so that it becomes fully, exactly what you want. This mostly comes in terms of fantasy. Things are made when we do things in fantasy.

Garment designed and constructed by Shpetim Zero.

Hunter: Sounds like you prefer to build.

Shpetim: I prefer to build because you actually create a look. And you can manipulate a look. You can manipulate a look better by building it than by trying to find it. It’s a lot more work, but it actually saves time cause you’re not running around town finding things. But with budgets…

Hunter: Sure, low budgets…

Shpetim: Right, it can be a problem. But if you do have a budget or a semi-budget, I prefer to build things. But even finding things, you can be innovative. You can do a lot.

Hunter: Like I thought that what you found for Jerod in the reading really worked and helped bring that character to life.

Shpetim: It was limited. The shirt didn’t actually fit that well. Certain things could be made if we had a budget. But it’s actually okay not to have a budget. You can still be innovative.

Hunter: What are your favorite movies, in terms of costumes?

Shpetim: The three I like the most all have ‘beauty’ in their names. So, Dangerous Beauty, Stealing Beauty and Stage Beauty. Dangerous Beauty was all done by Gabriella Pescucci. It was all done by Tirelli costume house, which is in Rome. We’re talking about real renassaince costumes, complete real constructions. Stealing Beauty is Bernardo Bertolucci.

Hunter: Oh yeah, he’s good.

Shpetim: Yeah in terms of movies, you could take Hellboy…who cares about the story line? But in terms of costuming and what Del Toro did with the look of that film….costume-wise that film is beyond brilliant. Or Underworld. I don’t even care about the story, but the clothing structure that was built and corsetry were BEYOND, you know what I’m saying? So I look at movies just for the clothing sometimes.

Hunter: Well, that makes sense because of your passion. That’s how you hook into it. So let me ask you this, in terms of the business side of these designers making clothing for film, are these designers making their money from costume design for film or is that just giving them the prestige to leverage into other things?

Garment designed by Shpetim Zero

Shpetim: You make money creating collections that go into mass production. The companies that make money in the fashion world are the companies that do mass production wear. American Apparel. Diesel. Bebe. Zara, internationally. Gap. These are the companies that actually make money because they’re selling to the masses. Selling to the masses is not necessarily creating innovative collections. Innovative collections are created to attract attention, but then you start selling to the masses.

Costume designing is extremely different than fashion designing. They’re two separate entities. They are related, in terms of design. They’re like branches of the same tree.

Hunter: Kind of like theater acting and film acting?

Shpetim: Even more distant than that. They’re very distant branches. Because costume designing, especially here in L.A., just deals with buying shit. No one is REALLY costume designing unless it’s Anna Karenina.

Hunter: I love that film.

Shpetim: Films like that are actually building. And even then, sometimes only the costumes for the main actors are being built, not the rest. Because there’s not enough budget.

Hunter: Not enough money, right?

Shpetim: Right. So for a project like Inside-Out, Outside-In, we’re not building. The creativity that comes into it is creating that “essence” that you’re trying to achieve and you have to be open to interpretation when you don’t have much of a budget. But I really want you to take a look at Hellboy and the creative aspect of what was done, in terms of puppetry and building. Innovative. Innovative. Innovative.

[AT THIS POINT WE TAKE A BREAK IN OUR INTERVIEW TO CHECK OUT IMAGERY FROM HELLBOY]

Shpetim: Costume designing is really crucial because it’s creating almost 50-75% of the first impact, visually. So I think it’s really important, whether it’s a fantasy, whether it’s a period piece or whether it’s current day, costume is very important. And it doesn’t get as much respect as it should just because people don’t understand it. They take it for granted, like the mother’s love. Once it’s gone, it’s gone.

Hunter: Even if you have a low budget production, you can still make sure the costumes fit properly. You can still make sure the color palette is right.

Shpetim: Yeah! You can’t use my wardrobe in your projects any more, though.

Hunter: OK.

Shpetim: You can find wardrobe, but not the costume designer’s wardrobe.

[WE LAUGH. AND IN MY MIND, I’M HOPING HE IS JOKING, NOT SETTING A BOUNDARY. SUCH IS MY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE MAGICAL AND MERCURIAL SHPETIM ZERO]

Designer Shpetim Zero, smelling the roses.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

First sketch from costume designer Shpetim Zero of “Abhaya in the World.” (As opposed to Abhaya…in the monastery).

Look out for an interview with Shpetim soon! We cover everything from costume design vs fashion design, creating a look on a low budget and the spiritual challenges of creativity. Plus, Shpetim reveals the three movies with best costume design ever. (Hint: They all have the word ‘Beauty’ in the title).

“Abhaya in the World.” Sketch by Shpetim Zero, who is prepping the costumes for indie feature film “Inside-Out, Outside-In.”

This week, I began collaborating with filmmaker and storyboard artist Monte Patterson to design the look of “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” Monte just moved to Hollywood from Indiana, emboldened by his successful short film “Caught” and his intriguing film blog “The Final Image,” which already boasts well over 100,000 followers (more on this in another post soon). So I knew I was in good hands as Monte stopped by my office. We flipped open the script and started talking shots.

As an “Actor’s Director,” I know I’m not going to go on the set and think up shots on the fly. Visualizing shots requires me to master a new language beyond the realm of acting and creating narratives, so storyboards become an even more essential way of testing out ideas and working things out in advance. It’s also insurance that I’ll be able to communicate what I want to the cinematographer and other departments. With enough preparation and hard work, your biggest challenge can become your biggest asset (or so I believe. More on owning your own skill set as a director in the next post…). With my skill set, background, taste and ambition, I can’t imagine doing a feature film without storyboards for each and every shot.

I knew I wanted to contain the action in as few shots as possible, both because I don’t see the film as a frenetic, fast-paced film with lots of arbitrary close-ups and to keep camera set-ups to a minimum. Also, it’s important to me that we have fun with the play-within-a-movie motif and to use a little savvy as we employ the illumination provided by the theatre lights.

Here are the results of our work together. Monte beautifully rendered two shots from a scene described in a post here. From darkness, stage lights suddenly turn on to illuminate a lone figure standing on stage in a wide shot. We cut in from the wide to see erstwhile performer Nathaniel Quinn enjoying a moment of theatre play, recapturing glory days, only to be “caught” by his producing partner Dorothy as she enters backstage in anticipation of their day auditioning actors.

What we’ve got so far:

Storyboard by Monte Patterson.

After the punch in from the wide, Nathaniel lifts his fist in mock triumph on the stage and says, “Enter Stage Right. A young man, filled with hope, crosses to the most beautiful girl he’s ever seen.” Nathaniel realizes that his face has softened with tears, feeling the opposite of the sentiment he expressed. From behind him, we hear a woman enter….

Storyboard by Monte Patterson

Nathaniel quickly puts his fist down and turns. The camera dollies and pans to reveal Dorothy entering from the darkness of backstage. She says, “Sorry, I’m late.” Nathaniel replies, “You’re not late.”

OK, so I don’t want to give away the whole scene, but that’s enough to give you a taste. Huge thank you to Monte for his beautiful drawings and I look forward to sharing more with you. In the meantime, hope you will check out some more posts about our movie and enjoy Monte’s blog at “The Final Image.”

What do you think of the first storyboards? Ideas? Questions?

– Hunter

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

My previous producing work on the short film “Winner Takes All” (a four day shoot) and the 68-minute web series “Dumbass Filmmakers!” (a 13 day shoot, including re-shoots) taught me quite a lot about what works and doesn’t work when it comes to scheduling. But neither project required as much ingenuity and brainpower as this new schedule for the feature film (a 24 day shoot – hey, a boy can dream!). Here are the strategies I used in drawing up the schedule. Do you agree with my approach? Please tell me now before I screw up my movie!

Top Five Strategies for the Schedule of “Inside-Out, Outside-In”

1. Location, location, location. The most obvious consideration in scheduling a low-budget feature is location. Thinking creatively about which locations can double up for different scenes is a big part of the process. The most stressful part of a shoot for me is a company move and especially stressful are two company moves that take place within the same day. Under the schedule I drew up, we’d be at one location for six days in a row (an entire week for us), a second location six days in a row (another week) and three locations for three days each. I’ve tried to schedule in a way that minimizes company moves and maximizes use of location.

2. Starting with scenes where I don’t have to act. Since I’m acting in the film as well as directing, I thought it was important to start out shooting scenes in which I don’t have to act. So, I’ve made sure I wasn’t acting for the first three-and-a-half days of the schedule. I feel this is about the right amount of time needed for a crew to start to get into the groove of shooting before absorbing the shock of the director needing to be both in front and behind the camera. This strategy worked well on the web series, so I’m keen to repeat it.

The second potential “star” part shoots three days. And I’ve managed to keep the main antagonist “star” part to eight days. Very manageable. The rest of the film will be populated with less-known actors who have fewer scheduling conflicts. Making the schedule easy on potential “stars” makes it that much more likely that they will say, “Yes.” At least, that’s my thinking. Plus, if you end up having to pay them more than other folks, you’ve limited the cost of that star. It just makes sense. To call an agent and say you’re producing an indie film and have a great three-day part for so-and-so sounds more reasonable to them than expecting a star client to headline your film when not many have heard of you. Plus, sometimes stars bring additional headaches on the set, however inadvertently. The crew might be distracted by them or you might need more resources to deal with a star, like an extra production assistant assigned to them. So limiting the days they work limits the amount of resources going to them. In both “Winner Takes All” and “Dumbass Filmmakers!” we had known personalities and in both cases they only shot two days. Remember, no matter how many minutes a star appears in your project, they are still in your film! So for super low budget productions, I think it’s smarter to use stars for meaty, juicy supporting roles that can be shot out quickly than for huge lead roles that might require 15 days and weigh down the production.

4. Shooting the subplot last (in case we run out of money). My film includes an intricately designed subplot that supports and pays off the primary plot. It’s essential for the film. However, God forbid, if we did run out of money somehow, I think it’s more important to have the main plot in the can before the subplot. Worse comes to worse, I can always go back and raise more money and shoot out the subplot a few weeks or months later. But I would hate to interrupt the momentum of the actors from the main plot for any reason. And it is the subplot. So if we’re behind and have to shorten it from six days to two or three, we can make hard decisions without it affecting the bulk of the story.

5. Shooting the scenes that require extras on the same day (and on a Saturday). There are three scenes that require extras in the script and all are relatively short. One takes place outside at a rally, the next indoors at a conference room and the final scene takes place at a house party. If the scenes were long, I’d say I was crazy for scheduling them for the same day. And maybe I am. But my thinking is…we get the scenes with extra’s done all at the same time. Obviously, this is the day we’ll have to provide more food, hire more production assistants, etc. And we’ll have to ensure that we find locations very close to one another or even on the same grounds. But the rally can easily take place outside a building that would house a conference room. Then, I’m just hoping we find the “house party” location nearby. And it’s certainly reasonable in the realm of the story that some of these extra’s can double up and appear in more than one scene. If I’ve got willing extras, might as well use the hell out of them. So I scheduled these three “extras” scenes for the first Saturday. Granted, it’s gonna be one helluva day. But since we’re scheduled to take Sunday off, at least people have some recovery time to deal with all those extra people on the set before we go to a much more controlled setting the next Monday. Plus, since we’re going to be under the SAG ULB contract, we don’t have to pay the extras and I figure it will be easier to recruit volunteers on a Saturday than any other day of the week because of the work schedules involved.

So…that’s my strategy on the first rough schedule, What do you think? Wisdom or foolery? Let me know, my fellow DIY filmmaker friends.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

On the spur of the moment, I decided to attend the four-day Digital Entertainment Hollywood event at the scenic Ritz Carlton hotel in Marina del Rey. Good call. Met a ton of cool hyphenates as well as some movers and shakers in the world of transmedia and multi-platform entertainment (note: it’s no longer new media for those who’re keeping score.). I’m still digesting what I learned and how it applies to an indie feature film, but one thing is certain – the emergence of new technologies, platforms and power distributors is changing the landscape of film. Here’s some of what I learned.

1.Once convergence happens, some will win and some will lose. The sentiment among Digital Entertainment Hollywood is that a convergence of television and Internet-based entertainment is going to happen. So just how powerful could the 97 companies given “premium” channels on YouTube turn out to be? Good question, but they’re certainly, at minimum, in a great position to take advantage. So growing your following on YouTube, Vimeo and whatever platforms you believe in could be a huge, worthwhile investment in your future as a filmmaker. Imagine if your subscribers can eventually flip to your custom channel just like they flip to NBC. Better build that following right now before others beat you to it.

2.People don’t just watch television. They watch television and use a secondary device at the same time. One of the esteemed panelists quoted a recent study that found that 63% of television viewers used a secondary device while watching television. Whether it’s an iPhone, iPad or other smart phone, the big boys are already making content to capture viewers in both places – at once (think “Walking Dead”). If you have content available on a secondary device, you might just keep your viewer’s attention (albeit split over two devices) rather than losing them to Facebook, their texts or whatever else they’re doing. As an indie filmmaker, it means re-thinking that bonus DVD footage to something that might be consumed on a secondary device while they watch your movie. So don’t just create DVD bonus extras, create character breakdowns or photo artwork that adds to the experience of watching the film.

3. Different demographics use the same technology differently. Some content or app creators fall into the trap of simply designing something for the iPad. Well, teenage girls use the iPad very different than senior citizens (many of whom do actually own iPads). So it’s important to think in terms of the demographic, not just the device.

4. When you’re on a panel, keep in mind to warn people when you show explicit content. Okay, so this has more to do with social skills than transmedia, but I got pretty annoyed at one of the panelists when a video game developer showed their 3D video game complete with U.S. soldiers getting shot and dying in what looked like a desert war zone. Now, how could the panelist know that I have a brother serving in Afghanistan right now? But still…if you have content that some might find objectionable or disturbing, you need to warn them before you play it. While I realize that video games are huge, not all of us are prepared to see that sort of violence without a warning.

5. When the character calls, your phone will ring. One content creator has developed a way for audiences to register before they watch the content. Then, when the character receives a phone call on screen, guess what? Your own cell phone rings and the actress yells at you, in addition to the character. When the character receives a text message that a bomb is exploding, you receive the same text message on your own phone. Kinda creepy and cool at the same time and goes to show you how technology is going to keep impacting the experience of consuming content.

6. Putting yourself out there is hard work and the results aren’t always immediate. I must’ve pitched my webseries “Dumbass Filmmakers!” more than a hundred times at the conference and, sure, it would’ve been nice to find an awesome distributor, agent or manager. However, knowing that I’m also building “Inside-Out, Outside-In” and am in the game as an actor-filmmaker for LIFE (sounds like a prison sentence), I tried to take the long view. There’s no need to annoy people with a hard sell now. Hopefully, these are folks that will get to know Fatelink and my work over many years and now I at least have an excuse to contact them with updates and they’ll look a little more familiar at the next conference.

7. Never follow-up with someone without spending 10 minutes on their website. I met an awesome guy at the conference and exchanged cards. I was excited to see him again and dashed off an email, making a joke about how he understood Chinese (his card included traditional Chinese characters). Guess what? It was Japanese. Totally embarrassing. Luckily he forgave me, but a little digging on my part could’ve prevented the mishap.

8. It’s about attracting the Never-Used’s. There are a lot of savvy transmedia people who’ve cancelled their cable subscription and rely mainly on the Internet for television (myself included), so we tend to think the whole world is trending that way. According to the first panel I attended, that’s just not the case. Many people who cancelled cable did so out of financial pressures and probably will resume their subscriptions as their economic fortunes improve. That’s not good for Internet TV producers. However, there’s a silver lining. Some young people getting out of college have struck out on their own and never used cable at all, at least in terms of paying for it themselves. So these groups will be much harder customers for cable to win over. If Internet TV producers can capture this demographic, that’s some serious leverage going forward.

9. What is metadata and how does it apply to the Web shows? Metadata is data about data. If you do subscribe to cable or IMDb, you may notice that some systems can recommend programming for you based on your previous selections or ratings. They also provide information about the director, actors, etc. The biggest gatherer of metadata for the entertainment business is Tribune Media Services and guess what? According to one of their executives, they’re developing a prototype to gather metadata about online shows and entertainment. I spoke with one of the executive there and she said they’re just trying to figure out where the threshold should be in terms of which shows and actors to track. They only want the most meaningful data, not clutter. Being listed in the metadata of Tribune Media Services is powerful, so I’m curious how many transmedia players they’ll end up tracking.

10. Whenever you go to a conference at a hotel, bring a banana and stop by Starbuck’s right before you arrive. Seriously. The hotel charges a fortune for stuff like that.

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker and actor living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

Just last night, I witnessed a well-done bedroom scene between a man and woman that included the man sheepishly commandeering a pillow to cover his character’s…well… excitement. The audience appreciated the chemistry between the two attractive actors and heartily applauded at the scene’s end…and rightfully so. Yet, hard-won experience over the years has shown me that had the scene been between two men rather than a man and a woman, the audience’s reaction might not have been so fully and completely generous. (If it had been between two women….well…the audience may have been even more generous, but that’s another story).

That’s why I was slightly anxious when I first approached a Nameless Actor to workshop a scene with me from ‘Inside-Out, Outside-In.’ He looked like the part and had just completed a commendable performance in a scene with a mutual friend. But that scene and my project were quite different.

The climatic scene in ‘Inside-Out, Outside-In’ includes some homoerotic friction expressed through choreography being acted out between a gay director and his straight male leading man. There was no kissing or removal of shirts or underwear or bedroom antics (no pillow, certainly), but still, the piece did include some choreography between the characters that you might see on ‘Dancing with the Stars.’ If it were a scene between a man and a woman, I’m sure it wouldn’t be considered very racy compared to some of the barely-clothed encounters I’ve seen at the studio over the years. But – for some reason – I didn’t feel like I was approaching Nameless Actor with an exciting opportunity so much as a challenge. I grumbled internally that someone as “evolved” as me still had remnants of internal homophobia and yet, approach him I did.

I explained to Nameless Actor right away that I was returning to the studio with the purpose of workshopping my feature script and described its homoerotic content. Better to be upfront, I thought. So I detailed the set-up of the scene and went over the general nature of the choreography. I offered to send the script for him to consider, but he insisted that it wasn’t necessary. He still remembered the last scene I’d workshopped in the studio and liked my writing a lot. He viewed the scene as a challenge and accepted on the spot. Grateful for his support, I explained that my choreographer Jamie Jeppe Benson was moving to New York City in several weeks, so it would be great to rehearse at least once before he left town. We exchanged information. Mission accomplished…or so I thought.

Within a week, I emailed the script. Then, the holidays hit. First Christmas, then New Year’s. I called Nameless Actor soon after the new year to make sure he was still down for the scene and its content after more time to reflect. He reassured me that he was very grateful for the opportunity and excited to get to work. I asked if we could get together within a week – to learn the choreography if nothing else. Jamie was packing and preparing to move any day now and it would be a lot harder to rehearse the choreography without him.

The first warning sign came at our initial rehearsal. More than three weeks after I’d sent the script, Nameless Actor still hadn’t read it at all. So I took about ten minutes and rehashed the plot and the climatic scene’s placement within it. We read through the scene a few times then Jamie – ever the professional and under a time crunch – suggested we start learning the choreography. To him, two males interacting in this way seemed straightforward and commonplace. To my surprise, we picked up the choreography pretty fast. Jamie gave us some tweaks and was exceedingly happy with what we’d pulled off, especially since neither Nameless Actor nor myself are trained dancers. I really thought that the scene would be easy sailing from there. After all, we’d managed to get through the toughest, most intimate aspect of the scene right in the beginning. I was wrong.

Nameless Actor didn’t call me back for a week. Then, a few hours before our class the next week, he left a voicemail that he was uncomfortable with the scene and would be backing out. I was furious. Adding to my anger was the fact that I’d gone out of my way multiple times to explain the content upfront and give him a chance to say “no” to the piece several different times. By the point when he backed out, Nameless Actor had possession of the entire script more than a month. And by now, Jamie had moved to New York City, making the choreography that much more difficult to teach to a new actor. I’d acted professionally throughout – explaining the requirements of the scene honestly, despite any awkwardness involved in my approach or follow-up. I couldn’t imagine that Nameless Actor would ever have backed out in a similar fashion had the scene been between a man and a woman. I was convinced that the only explanation for his drop-out was a combination of unprofessionalism and homophobia and I told him so in my voicemail response to him. In Hollywood in 2012 with the gay mafia supposedly on the rise, it was a little shocking to be treated this way, but I guess the more things change, the more they stay the same.

My anger didn’t stop there. I kept thinking about the dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, of erotic scenes I’d witnessed between men and women at the studio over the years. And yes, even erotic scenes between two women were not totally unusual. But was homoerotic content between male characters so rare that the studio couldn’t accommodate my script? Should I even remain in the studio? On a break from class, I confronted my teacher about just that. She noted that I was so angry I was shaking. “There’s not much I can say to you now. I know my husband when he gets like this. I just have to stay out of his way,” she wryly noted then gave me a hug. Then she said, “Don’t make the whole studio homophobic because of one person. Let me find someone for you. Let me choose. We’re still doing the scene.”

My anger slightly appeased and I could tell that she, too, felt a twinge of urgency in solving the problem. The very next break, she re-introduced me to Christos, a Greek actor known in the Studio for his good looks, daring personality and charm. But would the married-to-a-woman Christos be down for ‘Inside-Out, Outside-In’?

“I hear we are going to do some dancing,” Christos said to me, striking his best imitation of Fred Astaire/Zorba the Greek. I could tell he wanted to cheer me up. I almost cried. “He’s Greek – he’ll do anything,” our teacher added, smiling. So we exchanged information. And the wheel of fortune turns.

What did the whole episode teach me? Sure, there are homophobic actors out there, even in this day and age. And others just don’t see the value in stretching past their comfort zones. But if you stay open and fight for your project, you might just end up with creative collaborators even better than the ones you had in mind. And it’s through difficult experiences that our teachers and friends get to know and respect us better…and that’s a good thing.

If the beginning of this workshop experience is a metaphor for what creating the film promises to be, I know that we’ll confront a lot more homophobia and resistance along the way, but ultimately will succeed. And from now on, I will not apologize for my material at all when I approach actors or anyone, for that matter. The homoerotic content of the piece is beautiful and well-done and any actor who has a problem with the piece is not worth my very valuable time. Turns out I faced down homophobic attitudes – inside and out – and came out on the other side. And for that, I’m grateful.

Next time, see a video interview of Christos in the flesh and learn how our workshop of the scene ended up going. You just might be surprised. In the meantime, check out the reel of our initial choreographer Jamie Jeppe Benson. What would happen with the choreography now that Jamie lives in NYC? Next time, next time….

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

It’s hard to beat mindmapping as a creative tool for brainstorming. Rumor has it that no less than Steve Jobs used mindmapping to develop new Apple products. It mimics the way our right-brain comes up with ideas and makes connections between images, thoughts and realizations. Only, with mindmapping – unlike the actual thinking process – you walk away with a clear, concise and stimulating visual record of that activity. And you can go back and refer to it at any time.

I use mindmapping a LOT in the process of developing my feature film script. I mindmap scenes, characters, ideas. But it doesn’t end there. I’ll mindmap a financing strategy, the benefits/drawbacks of a certain name actor or even a segment of my target audience. It makes work super energizing and even fun (Mary Poppins would approve!). Plus, work created in a mindmap can easily be re-tooled for other mediums, like an excel worksheet or a powerful list in Gorilla (more on the awesome-ness of this software later).

So if I had loose lips that sink ships, I’d share one of my own mindmaps with you. But you must know by now that attempting to be mysterious is a bit of a turn-on for me. But TRUST ME – it’s worth adding to your indie filmmaker arsenal if you’re not doing it already. And if you are doing it already, consider expanding the number of subjects/ideas you put to a mindmap. Generally, the only thing you have to lose is time…and it’s a good investment of that.

There are plenty of free mindmapping programs out there. A little googling will easily show you a list with reviews, etc. I use MindNodePro. It costs a little money, but it allows the integration of visual images and hyperlinks into the mindmap, something important to a filmmaker, in my opinion.

Sample of a character mindmap

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).

In January, 2010, I went on a meditation retreat, led by local spiritual guru Betty Jones. Sandwiched in between the production of a short (“Winner Takes All“) and a webseries (“Dumbass Filmmakers!“), it was designed to be a much-needed break from the demands of the material world and, especially, Los Angeles. And I can honestly say that all the meditating…and sleeping…and gentle contemplating…restored at least a portion of my sanity. Of course, I also walked away from the weekend with a killer idea for a feature-length movie.

A little over two years later, I’ve written the screenplay of “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” This January, after some drama, we workshopped the climatic scene of the piece in Ivana Chubbuck‘s master acting class (more on this in a future post). And I’ve managed to do some rewriting based on that experience. We’ve already had interest by some private equity investors. One of my investors for the webseries saw a rough cut of that project and immediately expressed interest in signing up for the feature. That was a fantastic feeling…and a moment when my brain started generating things-to-do-lists and attempting to re-trigger an addiction to coffee. So I’m simultaneously refining the script and putting an investment package together while interest remains high.

But, for now, a huge part of the process is purely creative. Jotting down ideas for shots. Mindmapping the characters and scenes. Brainstorming about everything from character names to color palettes to costumes. And rewriting, rewriting, rewriting. That may bring you to the question – so what is the script about anyway? Well…I’m not ready to tip my hand on the story just yet…BUT…I will include a trailer here of one of the two films that have inspired me in the development of the film. I absolutely LOVE Bob Fosse’s brilliant take on a choreographer’s descent into that great twilight set against the backdrop of the fast-paced, experiential task of putting together a Broadway show. I’ve seen it easily 25 times and if you realize later on that I stole a shot or two from it…well…you read it here first.

—

Hunter Lee Hughes is a filmmaker living and working in Los Angeles and the founder of Fatelink. His current feature film Guys Reading Poems is touring film festivals and this blog is dedicated to the process of making his second feature film, “Inside-Out, Outside-In.” If you enjoy the blog, please support our team by following us on Facebook, Twitter (@Fatelink) or Instagram (@Fatelink).